There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest
(02-21-2011, 06:39 PM)Habitual_Ritual Wrote: I tend to agree that  use of the term disordered is a disqaulifier for adoption of the naturalistic definition.The real issue then is that Officials appear to send mixed signals with regard Homosexuality,what it is and how it is to be dealt with.Would this be fair?


Yes and no.

Have you read the directive from the CDF?  If not, please do.  If you did, why do you think there are mixed signals?  Because some bishops and priests ignore it and march in "gay pride" parades is not relevant to what CJ is saying which is the Church itself, through her Catechism, etc., is sending mixed signals.

She is not sending mixed signals in the Magisterium.  The directive is very clear:

Quote:Nevertheless, increasing numbers of people today, even within the Church, are bringing enormous pressure to bear on the Church to accept the homosexual condition as though it were not disordered and to condone homosexual activity. Those within the Church who argue in this fashion often have close ties with those with similar views outside it. These latter groups are guided by a vision opposed to the truth about the human person, which is fully disclosed in the mystery of Christ. They reflect, even if not entirely consciously, a materialistic ideology which denies the transcendent nature of the human person as well as the supernatural vocation of every individual.

The Church's ministers must ensure that homosexual persons in their care will not be misled by this point of view, so profoundly opposed to the teaching of the Church. But the risk is great and there are many who seek to create confusion regarding the Church's position, and then to use that confusion to their own advantage.

That same prefect laid down the norm that homosexuals are not to be admitted to the priesthood.

I don't think it's a question of "mixed signals" as much as flipping around the dial.

What the Church has said through the Magisterium is clear and consistent:  homosexual acts (even if the person doesn't identify themselves as a homosexual and wants to make some quick coin working in gay porn, for example) are always wrong and culpable within the considerations of culpability that goes to any other sin.  E.g., it is willful, etc.

People who don't like that channel just switch to the Cdl. Fairycake channel.  Or, in CJ's case, switch to the Protestant one that condemns individuals instead of acts.

ETA: "and culpable" for clarity
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: There is No Such Thing as a Homosexual Catholic Priest - by Historian - 02-21-2011, 07:03 PM



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)